ORDER

J. RANDAL HALL, District Judge.

After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no. 79.) Plaintiff does not offer any new information, evidence, or argument that warrants a deviation from the Magistrate Judge's recommendation. Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's objections and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as the opinion of the Court. Therefore, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiffs claims based on (1) deliberate indifference to safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Bussey, Caler, and Codey, (2) violation of prison regulations against all defendants, and (3)supervisory liability against Defendant Bussey. Additionally, the Court DISMISSES Defendants Bussey, Caler, and Codey from this case. Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Tommy and Jones for deliberate indifference to safety will go forward.

Plaintiff also claims that he inadvertently named Defendant Terri Bussey as a defendant and he attempts to reserve "the right to amend and add the warden of security" once he obtains that warden's name. (Doc. no. 79.) As the Magistrate Judge correctly found, Plaintiff failed to state a claim against Defendant Bussey under any theory of liability, including(1) deliberate indifference to safety, (2) violation of prison regulations, and (3) supervisory liability. (See generally doc. no. 21.) If Plaintiff merely intends to substitute the warden of security's name for Defendant Bussey, this will not change the analysis and the amendment will be futile. However, if Plaintiff wishes to amend his complaint to add the warden of security and assert different allegations against him or her, then he may do so in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15.

SO ORDERED.